Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If they paid more, they could get better help. Plus the people they hire wouldn't be so disgruntled and would do a better job. You really do get what you pay for.
So that implies that the current help will be unemployed.
Or, will be motivated to do a better job.
It is livable.
You need some roommates, shop at Goodwill, cook efficiently, take public transportation, etc.
WHAT?!
You mean sacrifice, do without, cut costs, work hard and earn what you get, like we used to when we were young and poor and working our way up?
What the fuck! That's horrible! You're mean!
Americans today deserve their own cell phone, and computer, and cable teevee, and monthly tattoos and a nice credit card budget, whether they earn it or not!
This is America, 2014! Catch up!
.
They deserve to be able to put a roof over their heads without having to find 5 other people to live with them.
Maybe or maybe not, employees and motivation are not quantifiable nor are they predictable. Giving someone a raise based on merit can have positive or negative effects, a raise based on a have to, I would not mean a better worker, it is all based on attitude.
Economics are hard numbers and you either surivive or you don't. So, if you cannot afford to pay a wage, you either cut costs somewhere else or you raise prices to the consumer.
Labor and food costs for a restuatrant should be no more than 60%, if it goes over that, then decisions need to be made. Doubling or even a 30% increase in labor means cutbacks and decisions on how to get the cost back under the 60% level. Sometimes this is achieved in cutting maintenance to the building, trying to negotiate a new lease, raising prices. Cutting electric, gas, sewer, water is pretty much out. The fact is with increased costs, you are going to have to make cuts or you go out of business.
All I know is if mw had kept up with inflation, it's be more than $16 an hour. IMO, in order to do what it was intended to do, it should remain at the same spending power.
And inflation would decrease the spending power as prices would rise to keep up with costs.
All I know is if mw had kept up with inflation, it's be more than $16 an hour. IMO, in order to do what it was intended to do, it should remain at the same spending power.
And inflation would decrease the spending power as prices would rise to keep up with costs.
Simple concept that lefties cannot understand.
What is wrong or degrading about shared living spaces?They deserve to be able to put a roof over their heads without having to find 5 other people to live with them.
I never made any claim about the poverty rate, I said people can afford to live on minimum wage.It doesn't support a family of 3 above poverty rate. Why shouldn't it have kept up with inflation? Why is it you think the lowest paid (and probably hardest worked) employees aren't worth enough for them to support themselves?
Exactly.Wrong. What would be the motivation?
^^the last two guys to post here are really special^^
^^the last two guys to post here are really special^^
Typically vapid LoneLoony post.
^^the last two guys to post here are really special^^
Typically vapid LoneLoony post.
Why'd you delete your comment?
No they don't but how 'bout you put your money where your big mouth is? Build or buy a biz and then you can give all the profit away to your employees. That's why we call it private prop ... your biz, your decision.
Is that it? Pretty wimpy!
Translation: You haven't the stuff necessary to stand behind the convictions you state here. Just whining that others must help carry your sorry ass. Got it.
Although the corporate tax is 35% the effective rate is only 12.6%. This is accomplished primarily by leaving and transferring earnings overseas which expand and enrich those economies. The solution is very simple. Cut the corporate tax rate to 15% and eliminate some of the tax loopholes that encourage corporations to shift earnings abroad. The results would be higher tax revenues for the treasury and more business kept in the US.It's been so long, I've forgotten a lot of the details. You do realize that was 40 years ago, right? But check your history, it was in the 70's that our corporations started to leave and the 80's they started leaving even faster because our government gave them tax subsidies, supposedly to built up economies in 3rd world nations, but they went around that and got guarantees from the countries government that there would be no unions and the wages would be guaranteed to be really low (I think it was 17 cent an hour back then). Cardboard cities sprouted up in Mexico along the border. Mostly women were hired as women are less likely to form a union and anyone that mentioned it turned up dead. Al Gore said when Clinton was elected, they'd stop those incentives but they never did.
Zenith was the last TV manufacturer to leave the states. They said they couldn't compete with the others.
Exactly. America has become unfriendly toward manufacturing and predictably they are leaving (see: Detroit). Maybe we should raise wages ... that'll make 'em stay.
BTW, I don't recall any US gov't subsidies being paid to companies to move overseas and I've been in biz since the early 1970s. Please support your claims.
The absurdly simple way to fix the corporate tax system - Tax Guy - MarketWatch
Although the corporate tax is 35% the effective rate is only 12.6%. This is accomplished primarily by leaving and transferring earnings overseas which expand and enrich those economies. The solution is very simple. Cut the corporate tax rate to 15% and eliminate some of the tax loopholes that encourage corporations to shift earnings abroad. The results would be higher tax revenues for the treasury and more business kept in the US.Exactly. America has become unfriendly toward manufacturing and predictably they are leaving (see: Detroit). Maybe we should raise wages ... that'll make 'em stay.
BTW, I don't recall any US gov't subsidies being paid to companies to move overseas and I've been in biz since the early 1970s. Please support your claims.
The absurdly simple way to fix the corporate tax system - Tax Guy - MarketWatch
With usual and customary business deductions, wouldn't that bring the effective business tax to zero?
Not that I want to bust your fantasy, but min wage earners are hardly the rainmakers in any company and are generally easily replaceable. Wanna make more? Develop some SKILLS.
Employees, no matter income, make all the money for the company.
Nonsense.
By paying $15/hr, how many employees' salaries are we going to change? Do we double everyone's salary? What about the guy that's worked hard for 4 years to become manager and earn $16 an hour? Does he get a raise as well or do newbies get paid the same?
The thing that makes me laugh ultimately is that all of the politicians know that this is a stupid idea. Even the Democrat politicians. But they must appeal to their ignorant base so they make it appear that they support increasing the MW to $15/hour when they really have no intention of letting that happen.
Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows it's naive at best, and economic suicide at worst.
Although the corporate tax is 35% the effective rate is only 12.6%. This is accomplished primarily by leaving and transferring earnings overseas which expand and enrich those economies. The solution is very simple. Cut the corporate tax rate to 15% and eliminate some of the tax loopholes that encourage corporations to shift earnings abroad. The results would be higher tax revenues for the treasury and more business kept in the US.
The absurdly simple way to fix the corporate tax system - Tax Guy - MarketWatch
With usual and customary business deductions, wouldn't that bring the effective business tax to zero?
No, the last President to raise the effective tax rate was Reagan, he cut the taxes but also ended many deductions. Later Presidents allowed them back in. Lower the rate, cut the types and many deductions back and you raise the effective tax rate. By shifting deductions and lowering the tax rates, you can lead businesses back to this country and help with the job market.
Sent from my iPad using an Android.
With usual and customary business deductions, wouldn't that bring the effective business tax to zero?
No, the last President to raise the effective tax rate was Reagan, he cut the taxes but also ended many deductions. Later Presidents allowed them back in. Lower the rate, cut the types and many deductions back and you raise the effective tax rate. By shifting deductions and lowering the tax rates, you can lead businesses back to this country and help with the job market.
Sent from my iPad using an Android.
Reagan 'raised the effective rate'?
